How does the decision maker behave? The complete answer to this question is rather impossible due to complexity and variety of decision situations, uncertainty and unpredictable creativity of human beings. Nonetheless it is possible to approximate the agents' reaction in the certain conditions. Numerous works on this topic yielded some decent models of the agent which I hereby would like to introduce:

\subsection{Homo \oe{}conomicus}
Homo \oe{}conomicus is probably the simplest model that can be applied in decision situation analysis. 
selfish agent maximizing his well-being

\subsection{Subjective Expected Utility}
These are four principal components of the SEU (Subjective Expected Utility) model: a cardinal utility function, an exhaustive set of alternative strategies, a probability distribution of future scenarios associated with each strategy and a policy of maximizing expected utility.\cite{bk:simonreason}
It is very neat model which is hardly applicable in the real world for it is really unlikely to possess reliable probability distribution of scenarios for the future, especially having comprehensive set of alternative strategies. Furthermore agents being humans are often incapable of formulating unified cardinal utility function over the possible outputs since they are led by various factors such as emotions, experience or intelligence which can easily contradict each other. When the agent is, for instance, an executive board of some enterprise, creating utility function may sometimes be even harder because of the interference of mentioned factors among all members of the board. Keeping those problems in mind it is clear that SEU model can be used only as an approximation in well defined decision situations.

\subsection{Satisficing man}



\subsection{Prospect theory}
One of the most famous and constructive criticisms of the SEU was brought by Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman\cite{tverskykahneman79}. \textit{Prospect theory} 
